In the article, Privacy Matters Even If You Have Nothing To Hide, the ‘nothing-to hide argument’ is rebuked as being a short-sided point of view because it implies that since certain people have “nothing to hide” that they won’t mind if you spy on them, look through their records, and use information without permission. Privacy is not viewed as a right, but as a form of secrecy.  The argument is made that everyone has something to hide and that all someone has to do is look hard enough.  Privacy is not that simple and there is not just one element to privacy.  There is also the assumption that privacy is about hiding bad things, not taking into account types of surveillance.    As the article states, surveillance can inhibit such lawful activities as free speech, free association, and other First Amendment rights essential for democracy.  When a third party company harvests your data and uses it to make marketing decisions, this can be considered a breach of privacy.  Especially since you have no say in what the data is being used for, no idea who is using it, or if the parts they are using are even accurate.  There is no involvement from the people in which the data is being extracted.  There is only the government, which takes the control out of the people’s hands, which creates a power imbalance.  Another noted problem is the distortion of personal data.  If the government is gathering personal information about people, it may not reflect the whole person.  The article urges caution in claiming, “My life’s an open book.”  There is a narrow understanding of how much is actually at stake and how deeply pervasive this could be if we did not have any rules governing privacy issues.

Katie Hill found out how one little photo leaked to the press could change the life of her career permanently.  In the article, The Humiliation of Katie Hill Offers a Warning, the article talks about the right-wing outlet RedState and how they published an article alleging sexual relationships between her and two staffers, along with an explicit photograph.  Hill later admitted to having an inappropriate relationship with a staffer and as a result resigned from her position in Congress.  Apparently, this was the first time an explicit photo of an opposition politician was used for political gain.  She was one of the first members of Congress to identify publicly as bisexual, and the staffer with whom she was in a relationship with was female, which caused a lot of media coverage.  Regardless of her personal life the article asks if the photos should have been made public at all and suggests that this fits into the category of “revenge porn,” since they were released without Hill’s approval.  The article says that the effects of nonconsensual pornography can be devastating and that victims report severe anxiety, depression, and are afraid to even go outside.  All of this does pose an interesting question:  What can be done about instances like this in the future and in our political system? 

Works Cited:

The Chronicle of Higher Education. May 15, 2011. Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing To Hide’ https://alfredu.instructure.com/courses/12951/files/folder/Readings?preview=632634

The Atlantic. October 31, 2019. The Humiliation of Katie Hill Offers a Warning https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/10/katie-hill-and-many-victims-revenge-porn/601198/